Thursday, November 06, 2008 10:18:36 PMmarching band isn't a sport in my books its clearly a statement of what people are doing for example: marching in a band. Speaking of sport i do alot myself, "internet porn" and my personal favourite "couch scratching"

Thursday, November 06, 2008 7:35:48 PMoh and marching band. . . how is that considered a sport? u dont need to be in good shape or anything to play music while ur standing up. seriously, ive met tougher bowling players

Thursday, November 06, 2008 7:34:14 PMyeah, he was still in the air so he technically didnt have control of the ball. idk a bunch of logistics i dont feel like getting in to. im a lineman and a backer so i dont really give a crap about catches just about hits

Thursday, November 06, 2008 6:21:00 PMI lol at all the people saying "THE ONLY SPORT THAT MATTERS IS MARCHING BAND".. you can tell they've never attempted to play another sport.. ever. Whatever helps them sleep at night, but, you'd get beat up alot less if you guys joined an actual BAND and put your potential talent to use where people actually care.

Thursday, November 06, 2008 5:13:58 PMLol, that kid is now a legend. All the kidsat the school will say " Remember when that kid saved the game by catching and throwing the ball in bounds? that was awesome."

Thursday, November 06, 2008 2:34:57 PMQuick thinking. As a side, I don't know why they don't make more use of lateral passes in American Football. It seems like a whole dimension of the game thats left out.

And as for the whole rugby/football argument, I've played both and both are tough. The argument over which is tougher is nothing more posturing and masked xenophobia. By the way check out Aussie Rules and Gaelic Football. It's frickin' madness!!

Thursday, November 06, 2008 10:47:38 AMAnd the world thinks that America is the arrogant ones, its always the europeans that have to bring up rugby is harder then football every time a football post comes up... they are different sports that require different skills to play, give it a rest

Thursday, November 06, 2008 10:41:05 AMsugar hyped its forward up the field not from pov that play was legit, and marching band is ok, but everyone thinks that the sport they play is the only "real" sport, but in marching band sure you gotta remember all that stuff but their is no one hitting you while you are remembering that, unless you suck and hit ur self

Wednesday, November 05, 2008 10:53:52 PMI agree with duck not only because I partake in the 'sport' of marching band but also as the crowd shows up only to watch the band perform...our football team sucks...(Woo!)

Wednesday, November 05, 2008 6:40:49 PMThe only sport that really matters is marching band.Refined culture, entertaining, and physically demanding. Not to mention it requires a sense of balance, and enough brain capacity to remember your song/routine, and drill, and the ability to take a rifle/baton/6 ft. pole to the head every now and again.

Wednesday, November 05, 2008 6:07:58 PMok so i dont comment on these too often cuz i tend to get carried away but here goes. football requires the most strength, its obvious. rugby definitely requires more stamina then football. lets face it, during football season u get stronger but u lose stamina. I started on both sides of the ball for my team and i was on almost every special so i was on the field a lot and i still think i was in better shape before the season started then i am now. still, dont go calling football a sport for wimps. it takes a lot of guts to face a guy thats probably a lot bigger then u and just go head on into him and hopefully bring him down.

finally, for the guy that said the only sport thats comparable to football is hockey. uve obviously never wrestled. ive played all 3 sports, eventually giving up hockey so i can wrestle. wrestling is the most physically demanding sport out there. we wrestlers hardly eat anything, work out, hardly eat again, and then work out so more. not easy my bud

Wednesday, November 05, 2008 5:34:19 PMThat aside, Rugby players DO have more stamina as it is a faster-paced gameI guess that's the trade off - strength for stamina XD

Let's just put it this way, if a rugby player got hit hard by an american player, it'd probably hurt helluva lot more than if he/she were hit by another rugby player (even if the american had no padding)On the other hand, American players probably couldn't last half of a rugby game, running up and down the field non-stop:D

Wednesday, November 05, 2008 5:32:30 PM"Actually, Rugby in australia is pretty much the same thing as what we just watched... except they have no padding. A mouthguard and some guys have light helmets if they have prior neck/head injuries from previous games.

And they wear short shorts :D

definatley not pussies"I will admit rugby is a tough-as-nails sportBut I have to say that I think the hits in American Football are have helluva lot harder hits, hence the need for paddingI mean I watch Football regularly, so to not sound TOO biased I watched a few "best hits" things for Rugby.. and I have to say I'm disappointed. With those hits the entire crowed went "AWWWWW" or "OOOOH THATS GOTTA HURT!!", but if it were American Football they would just be like "Damn, there goes a down!" because, from what I've seen, a "hard" hit in rugby is just about as hard as american players tackle on a regular basis.When you compare rugby "best hits" to af &

Wednesday, November 05, 2008 5:19:20 PMholy shi*!lassiter did that?lol i was just thinking "i wonder if its our team" but i guess i wasnt far off :Dthats so weirdlol at this rate our hornets will never be on IAB lol